NBP part II

tsue921i8wljb3

Shots fired!

"234,092 amber premises covered" apparently.

https://www.imagine.ie

rodge123

Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: »

Shots fired!

"234,092 amber premises covered" apparently.

https://www.imagine.ie

Yeah they have me well covered with their Fibre Speeds currently!

kenny111

are these claimed speeds are for both upload and download?

SkepticQuark

Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: »

Shots fired!

"234,092 amber premises covered" apparently.

https://www.imagine.ie

Ah yes I'm totally covered. They can't even offer me 2mbps up so they've already failed.

clohamon

1. Secretary General of DCCAE before the Dáil. (6th Dec 2018)

We had extensive discussions with Eir on its commitment to do so and with the European Commission on the latitude available to the Government not to accept the 300,000 households as part of a separate deployment measure. The clear response we received from the European Commission was that under state aid rules, where there was a commitment agreement in place, with clear targets and deliverable outcomes and so on, the option was not available to the State to decline it.

https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/debateRecord/committee_of_public_accounts/2018-12-06/debate/mul@/main.pdf

2. European Commission in a decision on a document request seeking Eircom's submission to the EC concerning the 300K plan.*

As a preliminary comment, I would like to clarify that under the State aid investigations, the European Commission does not assess private investment plans that do not receive State aid (such as Eircom's private investments registered in an agreement between Ireland and Eircom you referred to), but the interventions of the Member States relying on State aid. The European Commission is not aware of any State support provided to Eircom in the context of the agreement you referred to. The European Commission has not taken any official decision to approve Eircom's private investment you referred to.

*letter of refusal available (on request) here
https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/?fuseaction=list&n=10&adv=0&coteId=3&year=2019&number=6466&dateFrom=&dateTo=&serviceId=&documentType=&title=&titleLanguage=&titleSearch=EXACT&sortBy=NUMBER&sortOrder=DESC

heavydawson

clohamon wrote: »

1. Secretary General of DCCAE before the Dáil. (6th Dec 2018)

https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/debateRecord/committee_of_public_accounts/2018-12-06/debate/mul@/main.pdf

2. European Commission in a decision on a document request seeking Eircom's submission to the EC concerning the 300K plan.*


*letter of refusal available (on request) here
https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/?fuseaction=list&n=10&adv=0&coteId=3&year=2019&number=6466&dateFrom=&dateTo=&serviceId=&documentType=&title=&titleLanguage=&titleSearch=EXACT&sortBy=NUMBER&sortOrder=DESC

I'm not sure I see where they diverge?
The first quote in essence says that the EC is effectively forbidding the state to intervene in areas where private operators are offering a service
The second quote says the EC don't examine such private intervention as no state aid is involved in it.

Perhaps you're trying to make the point that the EC should (but don't) verify that the private operator is indeed serving the market such that intervention is absolutely still not necessary in that specific area?

clohamon

heavydawson wrote: »

I'm not sure I see where they diverge?
The first quote in essence says that the EC is effectively forbidding the state to intervene in areas where private operators are offering a service
The second quote says the EC don't examine such private intervention as no state aid is involved in it.

Perhaps you're trying to make the point that the EC should (but don't) verify that the private operator is indeed serving the market such that intervention is absolutely still not necessary in that specific area?

It seems to me the Department implied that they were instructed by the Commission to accept the Eircom 300K intervention - in particular. It's unlikely that the Commission could have done that unless they had assessed the plan in some way, maybe only in outline. But the Commission deny that they assessed it at all.

There is however a weasel word which might be the key.

The European Commission has not taken any official decision to approve Eircom's private investment.

It seems disingenuous of the Commission to imply/state that assessment of planned investments is a purely national competence unconnected to the Commission's approval of the overall plan. That seems to be what Mark Griffin was saying to the PAC.

On the separate question of whether the Concession Agreement is State Aid, I'd say it must confer some advantage otherwise there would be no point in Eircom seeking it. In effect it's a 25 year non-compete agreement.

westyIrl

I'd have thought that the EU would have no issue to answer in relation to Eir completing the 300k. Where they would have had to act would have been if and when the state aided NBP would be encroaching on that area and Eir had previously clearly signalled to the Govt/DCCAE that they were completing it on a commercial basis.

It was never a question of the state, as is often stated by the misinformed, somehow 'allowing' Eir to cherry pick the 300k. It was in fact the case that there was nothing the state could do to stop them and any clarification from the EU would have been to the effect that having the same 300k still part of the NBP would amount to illegal state aid.

In that regard, I'm sure the EU commission would have informed the DCCAE of this view if the DCCAE had indeed requested it, either officially or not.

I wouldn't see how the Concession Agreement would be in any form state aid as it was open to any other capable entity to do the exact same as Eir and there is nothing stopping competition in the 300k as long as it is on a commercial basis. Interesting topic!

KOR101

heavydawson wrote: »

I'm not sure I see where they diverge?
The first quote in essence says that the EC is effectively forbidding the state to intervene in areas where private operators are offering a service
The second quote says the EC don't examine such private intervention as no state aid is involved in it.

Good summation. And then, the discussions were simply scoping out the likely EU response to an intervention map that included the committed premises.

Water under the bridge on EIR anyway, and Imagine can hardly meet the technical requirements to succeed with a Committment Agreement proposal. There might be a business case for them to try to delay it, pushing it into a FF administration, for example. NBP is still much more likely than not at this stage IMO.

clohamon

westyIrl wrote: »

I'd have thought that the EU would have no issue to answer in relation to Eir completing the 300k. Where they would have had to act would have been if and when the state aided NBP would be encroaching on that area and Eir had previously clearly signalled to the Govt/DCCAE that they were completing it on a commercial basis.

IMO the EU made a significant interpretation of EU law - the SAG (and I'm not a lawyer) by saying an individual premises is an "area". Albeit there were 300,575 of them, they still don't amount to an area.

The purpose of the SAG is to promote the public interest in broadband by moderating the basic prohibition on state aid. If the 300K reduces competition in the bidding, makes the intervention logistically incoherent and increases aid to the cost of the taxpayer, it can't be in the public interest.

westyIrl wrote: »

It was never a question of the state, as is often stated by the misinformed, somehow 'allowing' Eir to cherry pick the 300k. It was in fact the case that there was nothing the state could do to stop them and any clarification from the EU would have been to the effect that having the same 300k still part of the NBP would amount to illegal state aid.

If a there's a question of interpretation, and weighing of the public interest, it's hard to say it's "illegal" in a definitive sense. Granted Eircom could have gone ahead without the agreement but it's perverse that guidelines set up to promote the public interest should be allowed to do the opposite. It seems the Commission never asked themselves that question.

westyIrl wrote: »

In that regard, I'm sure the EU commission would have informed the DCCAE of this view if the DCCAE had indeed requested it, either officially or not.

DCCAE had refused the plan for good public interest reasons. Eircom then made a submission direct to the the Commission (Nov 2016) and the decision to accept it was made by DCCAE at the same time (see Smyth report) seemingly at under threat from the Commission.

The Commission are now claiming they had nothing to do with it the decision.

plodder

clohamon wrote: »

IMO the EU made a significant interpretation of EU law - the SAG (and I'm not a lawyer) by saying an individual premises is an "area". Albeit there were 300,575 of them, they still don't amount to an area.

The purpose of the SAG is to promote the public interest in broadband by moderating the basic prohibition on state aid. If the 300K reduces competition in the bidding, makes the intervention logistically incoherent and increases aid to the cost of the taxpayer, it can't be in the public interest.



If a there's a question of interpretation, and weighing of the public interest, it's hard to say it's "illegal" in a definitive sense. Granted Eircom could have gone ahead without the agreement but it's perverse that guidelines set up to promote the public interest should be allowed to do the opposite. It seems the Commission never asked themselves that question.



DCCAE had refused the plan for good public interest reasons. Eircom then made a submission direct to the the Commission (Nov 2016) and the decision to accept it was made by DCCAE at the same time (see Smyth report) seemingly at under threat from the Commission.

The Commission are now claiming they had nothing to do with it the decision.

What is SAG referred to above?

Fwiw, I don't see the issue with those statements either. It's hardly the job of the EU to evaluate Eir's commercial plans. The concession agreement is not state aid and it's not a 25 year non-compete agreement either. There's nothing stopping anyone from competing with Eir. They just can't use state aid to do it.

KOR101

Imagine says it can deliver high-speed broadband to 800,000 rural homes

“ This includes 234,000 homes and businesses which faced a wait of five to seven years to be connected and where Imagine is now the only provider in the area,” he said.

The current EU state aid rules restrict governments from funding services where they are offered commercially by private operators. It is not clear if Imagine’s incursion into the NBP intervention area will affect the plan.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/imagine-says-it-can-deliver-high-speed-broadband-to-800-000-rural-homes-1.4009250

https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/news/imagine-says-its-connecting-rural-ireland-to-5g-broadband-38472184.html

clohamon

plodder wrote: »

What is SAG referred to above?

Fwiw, I don't see the issue with those statements either. It's hardly the job of the EU to evaluate Eir's commercial plans. The concession agreement is not state aid and it's not a 25 year non-compete agreement either. There's nothing stopping anyone from competing with Eir. They just can't use state aid to do it.

The SAG are the State Aid Guidelines administered by the European Commission

I agree it's not the job of the EU to evaluate Eircom's plans, but that's what they seem to have done - and then denied it.

By "non-compete" I meant that the Concession Agreement protects Eircom from competition from the the State.

KOR101

clohamon wrote: »

I agree it's not the job of the EU to evaluate Eircom's plans, but that's what they seem to have done - and then denied it.

It would be the job of the EU to evaluate EIR's plan but only in the context of an evaluation of an intervention map that included those premises. Sensible business to be open for discussions beforehand to avoid failed proposals.

clohamon

KOR101 wrote: »

It would be the job of the EU to evaluate EIR's plan but only in the context of an evaluation of an intervention map that included those premises. Sensible business to be open for discussions beforehand to avoid failed proposals.

I don't agree that individual premises are "areas". That was the problem with the 300K. It atomised the intervention area and we all know the consequences.

If Imagine are now allowed to do the same thing with their 800K "cover" then it's all over for the NBP.

KOR101

clohamon wrote: »

I don't agree that individual premises are "areas". That was the problem with the 300K. It atomised the intervention area and we all know the consequences.

If Imagine are now allowed to do the same thing with their 800K "cover" then it's all over for the NBP.

https://twitter.com/adrianweckler/status/1169594772698411008

Pique

KOR101 wrote:

“ This includes 234,000 homes and businesses which faced a wait of five to seven years to be connected and where Imagine is now the only provider in the area,†he said.

The current EU state aid rules restrict governments from funding services where they are offered commercially by private operators. It is not clear if Imagine’s incursion into the NBP intervention area will affect the plan.

As wireless was ruled out as being suitable for the terms of the NBP on the basis of speed and consistency etc (other than in edge cases), does that mean that wireless availability by commercial operators in the intervention area is ignored by the govt and the NBP will still be applied to those areas?

I would've thought so tbh. Seems like imagine just rattling the can.

Mortelaro

KOR101 wrote: »

Imagine says it can deliver high-speed broadband to 800,000 rural homes

“ This includes 234,000 homes and businesses which faced a wait of five to seven years to be connected and where Imagine is now the only provider in the area,” he said.

The current EU state aid rules restrict governments from funding services where they are offered commercially by private operators. It is not clear if Imagine’s incursion into the NBP intervention area will affect the plan.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/imagine-says-it-can-deliver-high-speed-broadband-to-800-000-rural-homes-1.4009250

https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/news/imagine-says-its-connecting-rural-ireland-to-5g-broadband-38472184.html

Mercifully,
The death announcement of Robert Mugabe this morning prevented a piece on this being discussed on morning Ireland
Mugabe's communications dept and Imagine have a lot in common so it probably made no difference

Orebro

Mortelaro wrote: »

Mugabe's communications dept and Imagine have a lot in common so it probably made no difference

BandMember

KOR101 wrote: »

Water under the bridge on EIR anyway, and Imagine can hardly meet the technical requirements to succeed with a Committment Agreement proposal. There might be a business case for them to try to delay it, pushing it into a FF administration, for example. NBP is still much more likely than not at this stage IMO.

Imagine are such a horrific sh*tshow that even Timmy the Tool knows better than to suggest or promote them as an option.

Given his track record, that says everything.

Ultimanemo

KOR101 wrote: »

Imagine says it can deliver high-speed broadband to 800,000 rural homes

“ This includes 234,000 homes and businesses which faced a wait of five to seven years to be connected and where Imagine is now the only provider in the area,” he said.

The current EU state aid rules restrict governments from funding services where they are offered commercially by private operators. It is not clear if Imagine’s incursion into the NBP intervention area will affect the plan.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/imagine-says-it-can-deliver-high-speed-broadband-to-800-000-rural-homes-1.4009250

https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/news/imagine-says-its-connecting-rural-ireland-to-5g-broadband-38472184.html

They say: Capable of delivering broadband speeds of up to 150 megabits per second.
I have Imagine and I do get 150 Mbps or even higher but that is only around 5 am , in the evenings it is 20 to 30 Mbps on an average day and much slower sometimes

The Cush

Peter O'Dwyer piece in the SBP - Government unsure if state aid issues could arise over broadband plan for "serviced" areas

The Department of Communications has claimed it is unable to determine if existing broadband services could create state aid issues for the National Broadband Plan, as it does not have enough information to hand.

Fixed wireless broadband provider Imagine last week said it had delivered reliable, 150Mbps broadband to 800,000 homes and businesses across the country.

This figure included 234,000 of the 540,000 rural premises earmarked for intervention by the state through the multibillion-euro NBP.

The government is restricted from using state aid, such as through the NBP, to address a market failure in areas where private operators have delivered broadband already or have plans to do so soon.

When asked if Imagine's 5G broadband satisfied the commercial investment criteria set down by the department, a spokeswoman said the department did not know.

"The department engages with fixed wireless operators through correspondence and meetings and has requested the necessary technical, financial and commercial information from those operators which would allow the department to assess whether their networks should be considered as high-speed broadband and excluded from the [NBP] intervention area," the spokeswoman said.

The spokeswoman said no submission had been received to date from a fixed operator that would "justify a change to the intervention area".

"Following the consultation, the department will conclude and confirm the scope of the intervention area prior to deployment of the NBP state intervention. The department will carefully consider all responses and the outcome of its assessment, along with non-confidential copies of the submissions, will be published prior to contract award," she added.

Headshot

So does that mean NBP wont beable to go to those 800,000 even through Imagine 5G is bs

Good old Imagine, such a shame excuse for "broadband".

KOR101

Headshot wrote: »

So does that mean NBP wont beable to go to those 800,000 even through Imagine 5G is bs

Good old Imagine, such a shame excuse for "broadband".

No, all it means is that Imagine is entitled to apply to enter a Commitment contract. We will know by September 20th if they are going to do that. It will certainly fail for not meeting the technical requirements, but it could delay things. And, they could challenge any negative decision in the courts, where it will also probably fail, but again delay things further.

allanpkr

5G is the biggest con for rural broadband. If you struggle to get 4g on your mobile 5g will be worse. 5g is mainly a city broadband with many areials needed , far more than you would be allowed in rural ireland imagine needs to stop conning the people on broadband.

The Cush

allanpkr wrote: »

5G is the biggest con for rural broadband. If you struggle to get 4g on your mobile 5g will be worse. 5g is mainly a city broadband with many areials needed ,

Correct for the current 3.6 GHz band but the mobile operators will be looking at the more rural friendly 700 MHz 5G band which is due to be auctioned next year, Imagine most likely will not be bidding for any of it due to price.

ednwireland

Pique wrote: »

As wireless was ruled out as being suitable for the terms of the NBP on the basis of speed and consistency etc (other than in edge cases), does that mean that wireless availability by commercial operators in the intervention area is ignored by the govt and the NBP will still be applied to those areas?

I would've thought so tbh. Seems like imagine just rattling the can.

i would hope so, its up to wireless operators toup their game and keep htheir customers - although the only one i have experience of you would only use if you have no alternative.

KOR101

"The department engages with fixed wireless operators through correspondence and meetings and has requested the necessary technical, financial and commercial information from those operators which would allow the department to assess whether their networks should be considered as high-speed broadband and excluded from the [NBP] intervention area," the spokeswoman said.

The precision of the number (234,092) of claimed amber premises covered, must mean Imagine is going to do something.

celticbhoy27

Haven't the government, rightly, came out already and said wireless isn't an option. The difference between the nbp and what imagine can offer is night and day. Speeds up to 150 my eye!

heavydawson

celticbhoy27 wrote: »

Haven't the government, rightly, came out already and said wireless isn't an option. The difference between the nbp and what imagine can offer is night and day. Speeds up to 150 my eye!

#5GMeHole

Messer1

Surely the entire Mapping Exercise is flawed and deeply anti-competitive. The information required in a submission is ridiculously detailed for any small, ambitious ISP to provide, no provision is made for possible significant new entrants, or for changes of circumstances for larger operators (take-over, new strategy etc.). It appears that the proposed contractor will be compensated for any encroachment into the final intervention area. This would dampen the market as it means that taxpayers will pay for non-service as well as service from a new encroaching entrant.

ussjtrunks

Are we still on track for an announcement at the ploughing championship?

heavydawson

ussjtrunks wrote: »

Are we still on track for an announcement at the ploughing championship?

I think the extra time allocated to allow the private sector to indicate where any future plans they have might encroach on the intervention area has pushed the final announcement into October.

dashoonage

ussjtrunks wrote: »

Are we still on track for an announcement at the ploughing championship?

Yup still on track for ploughing 2020

heavydawson

Last Friday was the original deadline for submissions to the department in the state-aid consultation process but operators were notified on Tuesday that the deadline was being extended to September 20. This means the contract is unlikely to be signed before September 30, as the map will have to be redrawn and the EU will have to approve it. The signing may not happen before the budget on October 8.

That was from a comment a few weeks ago in this thread

ArrBee

Messer1 wrote: »

Surely the entire Mapping Exercise is flawed and deeply anti-competitive. The information required in a submission is ridiculously detailed for any small, ambitious ISP to provide, no provision is made for possible significant new entrants, or for changes of circumstances for larger operators (take-over, new strategy etc.). It appears that the proposed contractor will be compensated for any encroachment into the final intervention area. This would dampen the market as it means that taxpayers will pay for non-service as well as service from a new encroaching entrant.

OK, I'll bite.
Other than "not having an intervention", what do you see as possible solutions to that?

Messer1

My bite back. The entire NBP has become much too complicated from operational, financial and strategic perspectives. Too many players and moving parts made unnecessarily complicated by pivotal involvement of a private operator (with mere €220 mln investment). Very much favour the approach recommended by the UL professors at the Oireachtas Committee for full State ownership. This would do away with the 1,400 page contract designed to protect the State's €3 bn and make the whole roll-out process much simpler including defining, planning and managing the intervention area - specifically this could be redefined every 2-3 years in the light of progress, new developments etc.

Ultimanemo

celticbhoy27 wrote: »

Haven't the government, rightly, came out already and said wireless isn't an option. The difference between the nbp and what imagine can offer is night and day. Speeds up to 150 my eye!

I do get 150 Mbps easily 5 am

but now

Gonzo

Ultimanemo wrote: »

I do get 150 Mbps easily 5 am

but now

a bit pointless having 150 at 5am and single digits in the evening when you need it the most. Clearly their network is grinding to a halt when everyone is online in the evenings. This is why Imagine are not fit for purpose and have no place in the NBP or any other national broadband scheme.

allanpkr

Total foolhardy. What does govn know about running fibre broadband and what com co. Would ever get involved if they could own it. Its been a long difficult process to make sure taxpayers money is safe guarded from the likes of eir and type who dropped out only cause the conditions were to strict ie 150 gb increasing to 500 etc etc . We are nearly at end of process and for the life of me do not understand people like you true motive to start process over again

Ultimanemo

Ultimanemo wrote: »

I do get 150 Mbps easily 5 am

but now

From reading the imagine thread your lucky to be getting the speed you are in the evening, some are getting less than 2 mbps

rodge123

A quick browse of Imagines open job positions tells you all you need to know about them.
A bunch of smoke and mirror cowboys!
Digital Marketing Manager, Social Media Role, Videographer, frontend Developer.

My speeds this evening with them.

Gonzo

rodge123 wrote: »

A quick browse of Imagines open job positions tells you all you need to know about them.
A bunch of smoke and mirror cowboys!
Digital Marketing Manager, Social Media Role, Videographer, frontend Developer.

My speeds this evening with them.

Imagine easily has the best marketing team of any internet service provider in Ireland. They post new videos every day, post screenshots, maps, someone has to make videos of the vans, they respond only to those who can't get the service or those who are very happy with the product, they delete comments and some screenshots from customers with poor speeds. They hand out promotional material in supermarkets and centras, they post articles on their miracle product and 5g and drum the 5g into customers till the cows come home. They run competitions to win tickets and hotel trips, they update their website frequently with statistics and lies. Eir/Vodaphone/Digiewb etc barely post a few times a week in comparison. I am not surprised they continue to expand their team of social media experts, videographers and web developers.

If only they put this much effort into the quality of service and customer support.

Ultimanemo

DubInMeath wrote: »

From reading the imagine thread your lucky to be getting the speed you are in the evening, some are getting less than 2 mbps

You only see reviews from people who have slow speeds, people who have good connection "They don't talk about it"

Ultimanemo

Ultimanemo wrote: »

You only see reviews from people who have slow speeds, people who have good connection "They don't talk about it"

Actually you will, if you read the thread, but they then turn out to have the same issues as everyone else once their area is at full capacity.

I did consider them myself but at the time two things stopped me.
1. The 20 GB download limit
2. I was told that I would have to cut down a large tree to get a proper signal.

I was told at the time (3 years back) that the limit might be increased, I understand that this has come about and some people in the thread stated that they were able to go over the original limit with out being throttled while others were.

The tree was an issue due to the cost of having it felled, as the cheapest quote was 3000 euro. I even had an inlaw who used to do this type of work have a look and they confirmed that the quotes were accurate.

However a neighbor less than 300 meters from us got their service at the same time and they have experienced the same issues with the speed dropping to nearly single digit levels as everyone else.

KOR101

Broadband roll-out contract won't be signed in time for Ploughing as was promised

https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/broadband-rollout-contract-wont-be-signed-in-time-for-ploughing-as-was-promised-38483708.html

Messer1

allanpkr wrote: »

Total foolhardy. What does govn know about running fibre broadband and what com co. Would ever get involved if they could own it. Its been a long difficult process to make sure taxpayers money is safe guarded from the likes of eir and type who dropped out only cause the conditions were to strict ie 150 gb increasing to 500 etc etc . We are nearly at end of process and for the life of me do not understand people like you true motive to start process over again

The gov wouldn't run the rollout - a SPV would be established and use contractors.

ussjtrunks

It honestly feels like this will never get signed off on, they keep delaying it by finding new ways to push it back, its very frustrating as even providers that used to be good aren't able to keep up with todays internet demands and most are seeing evening speeds of 3-4mb. As a stopgap they could atleast try to bring a fibre connection to every rural tower so people wont get truly awful speeds but they can't even do that. God help us if they avoid certain areas due to imagine "serving" the area.

Pique

KOR101 wrote: »

Broadband roll-out contract won't be signed in time for Ploughing as was promised

https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/broadband-rollout-contract-wont-be-signed-in-time-for-ploughing-as-was-promised-38483708.html

Goddammit!!

allanpkr

how much would contractors charge over say 25 yrs and would they be liable for all repairs . also do you have high speed broadband or would you accept legal challenges , compensation pay out etc etc .delay of at least another 5 yrs. again i ask motivation for this .